3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Can We Reliably Calibrate Deep Nodes in the Tetrapod Tree? Case Studies in Deep Tetrapod Divergences

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Recent efforts have led to the development of extremely sophisticated methods for incorporating tree-wide data and accommodating uncertainty when estimating the temporal patterns of phylogenetic trees, but assignment of prior constraints on node age remains the most important factor. This depends largely on understanding substantive disagreements between specialists (paleontologists, geologists, and comparative anatomists), which are often opaque to phylogeneticists and molecular biologists who rely on these data as downstream users. This often leads to misunderstandings of how the uncertainty associated with node age minima arises, leading to inappropriate treatments of that uncertainty by phylogeneticists. In order to promote dialogue on this subject, we here review factors (phylogeny, preservational megabiases, spatial and temporal patterns in the tetrapod fossil record) that complicate assignment of prior node age constraints for deep divergences in the tetrapod tree, focusing on the origin of crown-group Amniota, crown-group Amphibia, and crown-group Tetrapoda. We find that node priors for amphibians and tetrapods show high phylogenetic lability and different phylogenetic treatments identifying disparate taxa as the earliest representatives of these crown groups. This corresponds partially to the well-known problem of lissamphibian origins but increasingly reflects deeper instabilities in early tetrapod phylogeny. Conversely, differences in phylogenetic treatment do not affect our ability to recognize the earliest crown-group amniotes but do affect how diverse we understand the earliest amniote faunas to be. Preservational megabiases and spatiotemporal heterogeneity of the early tetrapod fossil record present unrecognized challenges in reliably estimating the ages of tetrapod nodes; the tetrapod record throughout the relevant interval is spatially restricted and disrupted by several major intervals of minimal sampling coincident with the emergence of all three crown groups. Going forward, researchers attempting to calibrate the ages for these nodes, and other similar deep nodes in the metazoan fossil record, should consciously consider major phylogenetic uncertainty, preservational megabias, and spatiotemporal heterogeneity, preferably examining the impact of working hypotheses from multiple research groups. We emphasize a need for major tetrapod collection effort outside of classic European and North American sections, particularly from the southern hemisphere, and suggest that such sampling may dramatically change our timelines of tetrapod evolution.

          Related collections

          Most cited references165

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mass extinctions in the marine fossil record.

          A new compilation of fossil data on invertebrate and vertebrate families indicates that four mass extinctions in the marine realm are statistically distinct from background extinction levels. These four occurred late in the Ordovician, Permian, Triassic, and Cretaceous periods. A fifth extinction event in the Devonian stands out from the background but is not statistically significant in these data. Background extinction rates appear to have declined since Cambrian time, which is consistent with the prediction that optimization of fitness should increase through evolutionary time.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Paleontological evidence to date the tree of life.

            The role of fossils in dating the tree of life has been misunderstood. Fossils can provide good "minimum" age estimates for branches in the tree, but "maximum" constraints on those ages are poorer. Current debates about which are the "best" fossil dates for calibration move to consideration of the most appropriate constraints on the ages of tree nodes. Because fossil-based dates are constraints, and because molecular evolution is not perfectly clock-like, analysts should use more rather than fewer dates, but there has to be a balance between many genes and few dates versus many dates and few genes. We provide "hard" minimum and "soft" maximum age constraints for 30 divergences among key genome model organisms; these should contribute to better understanding of the dating of the animal tree of life.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The fossilized birth-death process for coherent calibration of divergence-time estimates.

              Time-calibrated species phylogenies are critical for addressing a wide range of questions in evolutionary biology, such as those that elucidate historical biogeography or uncover patterns of coevolution and diversification. Because molecular sequence data are not informative on absolute time, external data--most commonly, fossil age estimates--are required to calibrate estimates of species divergence dates. For Bayesian divergence time methods, the common practice for calibration using fossil information involves placing arbitrarily chosen parametric distributions on internal nodes, often disregarding most of the information in the fossil record. We introduce the "fossilized birth-death" (FBD) process--a model for calibrating divergence time estimates in a Bayesian framework, explicitly acknowledging that extant species and fossils are part of the same macroevolutionary process. Under this model, absolute node age estimates are calibrated by a single diversification model and arbitrary calibration densities are not necessary. Moreover, the FBD model allows for inclusion of all available fossils. We performed analyses of simulated data and show that node age estimation under the FBD model results in robust and accurate estimates of species divergence times with realistic measures of statistical uncertainty, overcoming major limitations of standard divergence time estimation methods. We used this model to estimate the speciation times for a dataset composed of all living bears, indicating that the genus Ursus diversified in the Late Miocene to Middle Pliocene.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Genet
                Front Genet
                Front. Genet.
                Frontiers in Genetics
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-8021
                16 October 2020
                2020
                : 11
                : 506749
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Comparative and Experimental Biology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary , Calgary, AB, Canada
                [2] 2McCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health, University of Calgary , Calgary, AB, Canada
                [3] 3Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary , Calgary, AB, Canada
                Author notes

                Edited by: Michel Laurin, UMR 7207 Centre de Recherche sur la Paléobiodiversité et les Paléoenvironnements (CR2P), France

                Reviewed by: David Buckley, Autonomous University of Madrid, Spain; Roger Benson, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

                *Correspondence: Jason S. Anderson, janders@ 123456ucalgary.ca

                This article was submitted to Evolutionary and Population Genetics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Genetics

                Article
                10.3389/fgene.2020.506749
                7596322
                32117434
                bde7ff8b-7542-44e0-bc86-239ff837fe49
                Copyright © 2020 Pardo, Lennie and Anderson.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 22 October 2019
                : 03 September 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 165, Pages: 19, Words: 0
                Categories
                Genetics
                Review

                Genetics
                tetrapod,prior constraint,node age prior,fossil record bias,phylogeny
                Genetics
                tetrapod, prior constraint, node age prior, fossil record bias, phylogeny

                Comments

                Comment on this article